Title
Laya vs. Spouses Trivino
Case
G.R. No. 158965
Decision Date
Apr 14, 2008
Homeowners contested Triviños' construction in a subdivision, alleging zoning violations. HLURB initially dismissed, but Supreme Court reinstated HLURB's order, citing estoppel and jurisdiction.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 209538)

Background of the Case

The case revolves around the petitioners, Nestorio W. Laya and Rudy Martin, challenging the construction activities of the respondents, Spouses Edwin and Lourdes Triviao, within a residential area designated as a low-density residential zone according to San Pedro's Zoning Ordinance. The respondents obtained the necessary permits to convert part of their residential unit into a mini-grocery store, which led to complaints from the petitioners regarding violations of zoning laws.

Legal Proceedings Initiated by Respondents

In response to the construction activities, the petitioners filed a complaint with the Office of the Municipal Mayor and subsequently approached the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) after perceiving a lack of action. They contended that the construction was in violation of zoning laws, harmful to the residential character of the area, and detrimental to residents in terms of traffic and sanitation.

HLURB’s Initial Decision

On February 16, 2001, HLURB dismissed the petitioners' initial appeal for lack of merit. The petitioners then filed a verified petition for review with the HLURB on March 5, 2001, which resulted in a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on April 18, 2001, commanding the respondents to cease construction activities temporarily. This TRO was subsequently made permanent in an order dated May 30, 2001.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

Respondents challenged the HLURB's decision in the Court of Appeals (CA), asserting that the HLURB lacked jurisdiction over the case. The CA sided with the respondents, reversing the HLURB's earlier decisions and dismissing petitioners' appeal due to alleged procedural failures, including timeliness and the correct forum for filing the appeal.

Issues Raised by Petitioners

The petitioners raised several assigned errors, contesting the CA's ruling on jurisdiction, the timing of the filing of their pleadings, and the assertion that the construction violated zoning ordinances. They argued that respondents were estopped from questioning HLURB's jurisdiction and contended that the proper appeals channel was indeed HLURB, rather than the local zoning authorities, due to a lack of an established Zoning Appeals Board at the time.

Supreme Court's Findings

The Supreme Court found merit in the petitioners’ arguments, emphasizing that the respo

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.